JFK – Trump als Loser, und feige Medien, gelenkt von den Geheimdiensten?

Da hat er viel versprochen, aber wenig geliefert, ein Grossmaul namens Trump ist vor CIA und FBI eingeknickt:

taz-Broeckers ist enttäuscht, zurecht:

In einem Memorandum hat Präsident Trump – laut CNN “unhappy”, weil diese Restriktionen nicht “dem Geist des Gesetzes” entsprächen – den Geheimdiensten und dem FBI aber nun weitere 180 Tage eingeräumt, um ihre Begründungen für zurückgehaltene Dokumente zu überprüfen. Wenn sie dann weiter “nationale Sicherheit” rufen, wird auch weiter nichts veröffentlicht.

Grosse Klappe, aber nicht geliefert:

Das Cover Up geht also in die Verlängerung. Das Chaos ist komplett – und nichts Anderes war wohl auch beabsichtigt.Warum sonst hat man 25 Jahre gewartet, um genau eine Stunde vor Ablauf der Frist abertausende von Seiten zu publizieren ? Fiel es erst fünf Minuten vor Zwölf auf, dass die Veröffentlichung bestimmter Dokumente die “nationale Sicherheit” bedrohen, oder noch lebende Informanten bloßstellt ?

Die Geheimdienste haben Trump offenbar an den Eiern.

Auch Broeckers:

Dass das  ehemalige Nachrichtenmagazin  gegen weitere Geheimhaltung nichts einzuwenden hat, weil : 

“…der Akten-Hype dürfte falsche Fährten eröffnen, die Verschwörungstheoretiker befeuern, das Vertrauen in den Staat weiter erodieren und Trumps parallele Schattenwelt stärken, in der Realität und Fiktion immer mehr im Fake-News-Dunst verschwimmen”

–  wundert kaum.

Auch die FAZ befürchtet, dass die Veröffentlichung “den Verschwörungstheoretikern neue Nahrung liefern.”

Hallo “Qualitätsmedien” ! Seit wann habt ihr Angst vor Fakten, Akten und verstaubten Dokumenten ?

Es könnte zwar sein, dass euer Märchenglaube und die dumpfe Copy-Paste-Fake-News-Produktion von einigen dieser Fakten erodiert wird…aber hey, dafür sind Journalisten doch eigentlich da. Wie ? Zuviel, können wir nicht schaffen? Okay, dann macht halt weiter Fake-News, es glaubt euch eh schon kaum noch ein  Schwein….

Das ist recht drastisch: FAZ und Spiegel als unglaubwuerdige Fake News Verbreiter, und zwar bei JFK ebenso wie beim 11.9.2001.

In dieselbe Kerbe haut auch Markus Kompa auf heise.de:

Wie bereits einen Tag vor der Aktenfreigabe vermutet, halten die deutschen Medien ihr bewährtes Narrativ durch (JFK – blown away). Offenbar keine Aufmerksamkeit in der hiesigen Presse fand eine nun freigegebene CIA-Korrespondenz, derzufolge die CIA in den Medien 40 verdeckte Agenten platziert hatte. Wie diese zur Diskreditierung von Skeptikern zum Kennedy-Attentat angeleitet wurden, kann man im einem längst freigegebenen CIA-Dokument 1035-960 von 1967 nachlesen (50 Jahre “Verschwörungstheoretiker”).

Die Rheinische Post wird allerdings nicht von der CIA durch Agenten unterwandert sein, denn hierzulande arbeitet man eher mit konventioneller Kontaktpflege (Jan Fleischhauer, die Atlantik-Brücke und die CIA).

Klar doch ist Klaus Kleber ebenso ein Geheimdienst-Asset wie der Spiegel-Transatlantiker, aber es ist mehr als das, was die Medien gleichschaltet. (siehe das Video gestern ganz unten im Beitrag).

Kompa hat recht, Broeckers hat recht, Prof. Mausfeld und Augstein aber auch.

Was meint ihr denn, wieviel Hundert das heutzutage sind? Und wieviel Tausend Journalisten der Meinungslinie folgen, weil sie es muessen, oder den Job verlieren?

Freie Medien, das ist eine Illusion. Wenn ueberhaupt, dann sind das Internetblogs, Alternative Medien. Aber nie nie nie der Regierungsfunk GEZ-Sender oder gar die Konzernmedien…

Der Meinungskorridor ist strikt limitiert:

So ist das. Ganz genau so funktioniert die Gleichschaltung: einige geheimdienstliche Meinungsfuehrer geben die Marschrichtung vor, in den wenigen Leidmedien, der Rest kuscht. So war das schon vor 50 Jahren, als die CIA die abweichenden Meinungen zu den Moerdern (Hintermaennern) der JFK-Ermordung mit dem Begriff “Verschwoerungstheoretiker” zu diskreditieren begann. Wie bitte sollte das denn gelingen ohne haufenweise Journalisten, die das umsetzten?

Wie soll denn das Heute gelingen, das mit der Deutungshoheit, ohne die Austs, die Fleischhauers und die Klebers?

Ebent 🙂

.

Strikt auf Linie sind uebrigens Broeckers (altlinks) und Kompa (auch links) beim NSU. Niemals hat man da Kritisches von ihnen gelesen…

.

Nachtrag: Hat Freeman recht, und Trump hat die CIA bei den Eiern?

Verlängerung der Geheimhaltung

Zum Schluss, Donald Trump hat dem Wunsch der CIA nachgegeben und NICHT alle JFK-Dokumente freigegeben. Die CIA begründet die weitere Geheimhaltung mit “nationaler Sicherheit” … 54 Jahre nach der Tat!

Für mich ist das der Beweis, die CIA war federführend im Staatsstreich gegen Kennedy und will dass das immer noch nicht ans Licht kommt. Schliesslich ist die CIA auf Umstürze und Regimewechsel spezialisiert, ob im Inland oder Ausland.

Die CIA, die ja ein Staat im Staate ist, hat von Trump eine Verlängerung der Geheimhaltung für weitere 25 Jahre verlangt. Trump ist darauf nicht eingegangen und hat die Frist bis zum kommenden April 2018 verlängert, wo dann eine neue Entscheidung von ihm gefällt wird.

Trump hat die CIA dadurch an den Ei… gepackt und fordert im Gegenzug das Beenden der Behauptung über eine geheime Zusammenarbeit von Trump mit Russland. Wenn sie das Russia-Gate nicht mit ihren kontrollierten Medien und Abgeordneten beenden, wird alles im April über die CIA bekannt.

Ich nenne was evident ist: Die CIA-Aufzeichnungen die weiter unter Verschluss bleiben haben nichts mit “nationaler Sicherheit” zu tun. Sie haben aber alles mit der Rolle der CIA am Sturz der Kennedy-Regierung im November 1963 zu tun, die in den Augen des nationalen Sicherheits-Establishments eine Gefahr für die eigenen Interessen darstellte, weil sie eine freundschaftliche Beziehung mit der Sowjetunion sprich Russland aufbaute.

Frieden ist das letzte was sie wollen, denn Krieg ist das beste Geschäft!

Das gleiche gilt heute noch. Trump ist es verboten mit Moskau normale diplomatische Beziehungen einzugehen, denn die Elite benötigt immer einen Feind für den permanentem Kriegszustand, um die militärischen Interventionen und die Waffenproduktion zu rechtfertigt.

Deshalb die ständige Verleumdung und Kriegshetze gegen Russland und Präsident Putin.

Lee-Harvey Oswald hatte überhaupt kein Motiv Präsident Kennedy zu ermorden, aber der Militärisch-Industrielle-Komplex und die Finanzmafia schon. Sie wollten ihn weg haben weil er ihnen zu gefährlich wurde und haben ihn mit Johnson ersetzt, der alles tat was sie befohlen haben.

Hier weiterlesen: Alles Schall und Rauch: Neue Erkenntnisse aus den JFK-Dokumenten http://alles-schallundrauch.blogspot.com/2017/10/neue-erkenntnisse-aus-den-jfk-dokumenten.html#ixzz4wy9VSEzR

Wenn Freeman recht hat, dann lebt Trump gefaehrlich, so wie damals JFK.

6 Gedanken zu „JFK – Trump als Loser, und feige Medien, gelenkt von den Geheimdiensten?“

  1. Ein Motiv, das – ich hätte fast geschrieben »merkwürdigerweise« – die hiesige Leserschaft versteht sicher die Ironie – weder von der gleichgeschalteten Gleichstrompresse noch von linken sogenannten “Zweiflern” wie Jebsen, Brökers, Stein und dem 3SAT-Grafiker, dessen Namen eine gewisse Ähnlichkeit mit dem des Quelle-Gründers aufweist, jemals erwähnt wird, das aber m.E. das bisher gewichtigste, plausibelste und am besten dokumentierte ist (und da braucht man sich gar nicht auf angebliche “Verschwörungstheorien” wie die FED-Fiat-Money-Geschichte und ob Kennedy daran was ändern wollte – wenn er es wollte, wäre dies zusammen mit der nachfolgend geschilderten nachweisbaren Geschichte mit Sicherheit sein Todesurteil gewesen – Ausführende und Hintermänner dieselben wie 38 Jahre später bei 9/11):

    Das Buch, auf das ich der nachfolgende Text bezieht, ist:

    Michael Collins Piper »Final Judgement. The Missing Link in the JFK Assassination Conspiracy« American Free Press 2004 (ISBN-10: 0974548405
    ISBN-13: 978-0974548401)

    Mossad And The JFK Assassination

    “Israel need not apologize for the assassination
    or destruction of those who seek to destroy it.
    The first order of business for any country
    is the protection of its people.”
    Washington Jewish Week, October 9, 1997

    In March, 1992, Illinois Representative Paul Findley said in »The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs« “It is interesting – but not surprising – to note that in all the words written and uttered about the Kennedy assassination, Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, has never been mentioned.”

    Considering that the Mossad is quite possibly the most ruthless and efficient intelligence agency in the world, it is peculiar that they have never been scrutinized in relation to the Kennedy assassination, especially when practically every other entity in the world (short of Elvis impersonators) has been implicated. But that all changed in January 1994 with the release of Michael Collins Piper‘s »Final Judgment«. In this book, Piper says, “Israel’s Mossad was a primary (and critical) behind the scenes player in the conspiracy that ended the life of JFK. Through its own vast resources and through its international contacts in the intelligence community and in organized crime, Israel had the means, it had the opportunity, and it had the motive to play a major frontline role in the crime of the century – and it did.”

    Their motive? Israel’s much touted Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, who ruled that country from its inception in 1948 until he resigned on June 16, 1963, was so enraged at John F. Kennedy for not allowing Israel to become a nuclear power that, Collins asserts, in his final days in office he commanded the Mossad to become involved in a plot to kill America’s president.

    Ben-Gurion was so convinced that Israel’s very survival was in dire jeopardy that in one of his final letters to JFK he said, “Mr. President, my people have the right to exist, and this existence is in danger.”

    In the days leading up to Ben-Gurion’s resignation from office, he and JFK had been involved in an unpublicized, contentious debate over the possibility of Israel getting nuclear capabilities. Their disagreement eventually escalated into a full-fledged war of words that was virtually ignored in the press. Ethan Bronner wrote about this secret battle between JFK and Ben-Gurion years later in a »New York Times« article on October 31, 1998, calling it a “fiercely hidden subject.” In fact, the Kennedy/Ben-Gurion conversations are still classified by the United States Government. Maybe this is the case because Ben-Gurion’s rage and frustration became so intense – and his power so great within Israel – that Piper contends it was at the center of the conspiracy to kill John Kennedy. This stance is supported by New York banker Abe Feinberg, who describes the situation as such: “Ben-Gurion could be vicious, and he had such a hatred of the old man [Joe Kennedy, Sr., JFK’s father].” Ben-Gurion despised Joe Kennedy because he felt that not only was he an anti-Semite, but that he had also sided with Hitler during the 1930’s and 40’s.

    Anyway, Ben-Gurion was convinced that Israel needed nuclear weapons to insure its survival, while Kennedy was dead-set against it. This inability to reach an agreement caused obvious problems. One of them revolved around Kennedy’s decision that he would make America his top priority in regard to foreign policy, and not Israel! Kennedy planned to honor the 1950 Tripartite Declaration which said that the United States would retaliate against any nation in the Middle East that attacked any other country. Ben-Gurion, on the other hand, wanted the Kennedy Administration to sell them offensive weapons, particularly Hawk missiles.

    The two leaders thus engaged in a brutal letter exchange, but Kennedy wouldn’t budge. Ben-Gurion, obsessed by this issue, slipped into total paranoia, feeling that Kennedy’s obstinance was a blatant threat to the very existence of Israel as a nation. Piper writes, “Ben-Gurion had devoted a lifetime creating a Jewish State and guiding it into the world arena. And, in Ben-Gurion’s eyes, John F. Kennedy was an enemy of the Jewish people and his beloved state of Israel.” He continues, “The ‘nuclear option’ was not only at the very core of Ben-Gurion’s personal world view, but the very foundation of Israel’s national security policy.”

    […]

    Kennedy, on the other hand, was adamant in his refusal to promote Israel’s ascension to the nuclear stage. Avener Cohen, in »Israel and the Bomb«, stresses, “No American president was more concerned with the danger of nuclear proliferation than John Fitzgerald Kennedy. He was convinced that the spread of nuclear weapons would make the world more dangerous and undermine U.S. interests.” Cohen continues at the end of this passage, “The only example Kennedy used to make this point was Israel.”

    Realizing that Kennedy would not change his mind, Ben-Gurion decided to join forces with Communist China. Both countries were greatly interested in creating nuclear programs, and so began their secret joint dealings. Working in unison through intermediary Shaul Eisenberg, who was a partner of Mossad gun-runner and accountant Tibor Rosenbaum¹, Israel and China proceeded to develop their own nuclear capabilities without the knowledge of the United States.

    […]

    Intent on pursuing this path, the Israeli’s constructed a nuclear facility at Dimona. When Kennedy demanded that the U.S. inspect this plant, Ben-Gurion was so incensed that he erected another PHONY facility that held no evidence of nuclear research and development. […] Fully aware of their shenanigans, though, JFK told Charles Bartlett, “The sons of bitches lie to me constantly about their nuclear capability.”

    Avner Cohen, in »Israel and the Bomb«, reiterates this claim by saying that Ben-Gurion had taken the nuclear issue so closely to heart that he, “concluded that he could not tell the truth about Dimona to American leaders, not even in private.”

    Dr. Gerald M. Steinberg, political science professor at Bar-Ilan University’s BESA Center for Strategic Studies in Tel Aviv, weighs in by saying, “Between 1961 and 1963, the Kennedy administration placed a great deal of pressure on Ben-Gurion in the effort to pressure for acceptance of international inspection of Dimona and Israeli abdication of their nuclear weapons. This pressure apparently did not alter Israeli policy, but it was a contributing factor to Ben-Gurion’s resignation in 1963.” […]

    In »Israel and the Bomb«, Avner Cohen reinforces this point. “To force Ben-Gurion to accept the conditions, Kennedy exerted the most useful leverage available to an American president in dealing with Israel: a threat that an unsatisfactory solution would jeopardize the U.S. government’s commitment to, and support of, Israel.”

    The pressure on Ben-Gurion was so immense that he ended up leaving office. But Kennedy, in true pit-bull style, didn’t let up on Ben-Gurion’s successor, Levi Eshkol, as Avner Cohen reports. “Kennedy told Eshkol that the U.S. commitment and support of Israel ‘could be seriously jeopardized’ if Israel did not let the U.S. obtain ‘reliable information’ about its efforts in the nuclear field. Kennedy’s demands were unprecedented. They amounted, in effect, to an ultimatum.” Cohen concludes this thought by asserting, “Kennedy’s letter precipitated a near-crisis situation in Eshkol’s office.” […]

    Let’s return, though, to JFK’s assassination and the direct results of it in regard to the Jewish lobby, American foreign policy, and the militarization of Israel. To understand how powerful the Israeli lobby is in this country, venerable Senator J. William Fulbright told CBS »Face the Nation« on April 15, 1973, “Israel controls the U.S. Senate. The Senate is subservient, much too much; we should be more concerned about U.S. interests rather than doing the bidding of Israel. The great majority of the Senate of the U.S. – somewhere around 80% – is completely in support of Israel; anything Israel wants; Israel gets. This has been demonstrated time and again, and this has made [foreign policy] difficult for our government.”

    Do you hear what Senator Fulbright said? This isn’t a crazy conspiracy theorist or a KKK anti-Semite. It’s a much-respected U.S. Senator saying that about 80% of the Senate is in Israel’s hip pocket. Adding clout to this argument is Rep. Paul Findley who was quoted in »The Washington Report on Middle East Affairs« in March, 1992, “During John Kennedy’s campaign for the presidency, a group of New York Jews had privately offered to meet his campaign expenses if he would let them set his Middle East policy. He did not agree … As the president, he provided only limited support of Israel.” ²

    To understand how important Kennedy’s decisions were during his short-lived presidency, we need to look at the issue of campaign finance. Considering how influential the Israeli lobby is in the U.S. Senate (hearkening back to the words of Senator Fulbright), they had to have been enraged when President Kennedy genuinely wanted to cut the knees out from under the current campaign finance methods because it made politicians so reliant upon the huge cash inlays of special-interest groups. Regrettably, Kennedy did not have the time to implement this program, and to this day our political system is still monopolized by lobbyists from the very same special-interest groups. One can only imagine what changes would have occurred in regard to our foreign policy had Kennedy eradicated these vipers and blood-suckers from the halls of Congress.

    Tragically, Kennedy’s ideas never came to fruition, and his heated battle with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion over whether Israel should be allowed to develop a nuclear program was ultimately lost. The reason why is that Lyndon Baines Johnson, who Kennedy intended to drop from his ticket in 1964 due to his extreme dislike for, had a complete reversal in foreign policy. As you will see, not only did Israel’s nuclear program move ahead unchecked; they also became the primary beneficiary of our foreign aid.

    But this absolute turnaround would not have occurred if Kennedy would not have been assassinated. Up until LBJ became president, Kennedy dealt with the Middle East in a way that most benefited the U.S. His primary goal – and one which would most keep the peace – was a balance of power in the Middle East so that each and every nation would be secure. This decision adhered to the Tripartite Declaration which the U.S. signed in 1950. But under the Johnson administration, this fragile balance was overturned, and by 1967 – only four years after Kennedy’s assassination – the U.S. was Israel’s main weapons supplier, and OUR best interests were put well behind those of Israel!

    As Michael Collins Piper writes: “The bottom line is this: JFK was adamantly determined to stop Israel from building the nuclear bomb. LBJ simply looked the other way. JFK’s death did indeed prove beneficial to Israel’s nuclear ambitions and the evidence proves it.

    Reuven Pedatzer, in a review of Avner Cohen’s »Israel and the Bomb«, in the Israeli Newspaper Ha’aretz on February 5, 1999 wrote, “The murder of American president John F. Kennedy brought to an abrupt end the massive pressure being applied by the U.S. administration on the government of Israel to discontinue their nuclear program.” He continues, “Kennedy made it quite clear to the Israeli Prime Minister that he would not under any circumstances agree to Israel becoming a nuclear state.” Pedatzer concludes, “Had Kennedy remained alive, it is doubtful whether Israel would today have a nuclear option,” and that, “Ben-Gurion’s decision to resign in 1963 was taken to a large extent against the background of the tremendous pressure that Kennedy was applying on him concerning the nuclear issue.”

    If you’re still not convinced; how about some numbers? In Kennedy’s last fiscal budget year of 1964, Israeli aid was $40 million. In LBJ’s first budget of 1965, it soared to $71 million, and in 1966 more than tripled from two years earlier to $130 million! Plus, during Kennedy’s administration, almost none of our aid to Israel was military in nature. Instead, it was split equally between development loans and food assistance under the PL480 Program. Yet in 1965 under the Johnson administration, 20% of our aid to Israel was for the military, while in 1966, 71% was used for war-related materials.

    Continuing in this same vein, in 1963 the Kennedy administration sold 5 Hawk missiles to Israel as part of an air-defense system. In 1965-66, though, LBJ laid 250 tanks on Israel, 48 Skyhawk attack aircrafts, plus guns and artillery which were all offensive in nature. If you ever wondered when the Israeli War Machine was created, this is it! LBJ was its father.

    According to Stephen Green in »Taking Sides: America’s Secret Relations with a Militant Israel«, “The $92 million in military assistance provided in fiscal year 1966 was greater than the total of all official military aid provided to Israel cumulatively in all the years going back to the foundation of that nation in 1948.”

    Green continues, “70% of all U.S. official assistance to Israel has been military. America has given Israel over $17 billion in military aid since 1946, virtually all of which – over 99% – has been provided since 1965.” […]

    http://www.john-f-kennedy.net/mossadandtheassassination.htm

    (Fortsetzung wegen Spamfilter in weiterem Kommentar)

  2. Einige Anmerkungen und Ergänzungen zu obigem Text:

    Anm. 1 = »What the book does say is that: When New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison charged businessman Clay Shaw with participation in the JFK assassination conspiracy, Garrison stumbled upon the Israeli Mossad connection to the murder of President Kennedy. Shaw served on the board of a shadowy corporation known as Permindex. A primary shareholder in Permindex was the Banque De Credit International of Geneva, founded by Tibor Rosenbaum, an arms procurer and financier for the Mossad.« (Der wird in obigem Text auch erwähnt)

    http://www.rense.com/general42/enemies.htm

    Anm. 2 = Seltsamerweise befand sich unter den kürzlich freigegebenen Dokumenten offenbar auch dieses:

    »11/21/63 subject [ECHEVARRIA, Homer S.] allegedly told informant: “We now have plenty of money — our new backers are Jews — as soon as ‘we’ or (they) take care of Kennedy…” Subject expressed favourable attitude toward LBJ

    Organizations to which subject belongs: anti-Castro cuban«

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dMr9UI7XSvk (Min. 01:50)

    1. Sagen wir mal so: Der Mossad als JFK-Killer ist drastisch unterrepraesentiert, wenn deine Kommentare inhaltlich zutreffen.
      Generell wird JFK als sehr positiv gezeichnet: Gegen die Zentralbank war er, gegen den Vietnamkrieg, fuer ein Ende des Kalten Krieges etc.
      Ich hab mit diesem Bild sehr grosse Schwierigkeiten.

      Dass JFK vom Mossad ermordet wurde wegen Gegnerschaft zur israelischen Atombombe, das wird so schnell nicht zur Mehrheitsmeinung werden.
      Im Gegenteil wird man “Vorsicht Judenmacke” hoeren.
      Das ist Dir aber wahrscheinlich eh klar, oder nicht?

      Denke die Leute glauben eher nicht, dass es Israel, ein Zwergstaat, gerade 15 Jahre alt wagen wuerde, einen US-Praesisdenten zu ermorden. Die Vertuschung und den Patsy Oswald konnten nur die USA selber hinbekommen.

      9/11 sehe ich aehnlich. Ohne die US-Administration nicht machbar, nicht vertuschbar.

      1. Das ist natürlich klar, daß das in beiden Fällen (JFK & 9/11) eine Koproduktion war und die US-Schattenregierung (wenn man weiß, welches Personal die ganz überwiegend stellt, dann wird einen dies nicht sehr wundern) da über beide Ohren mit drinsteckt und für die freie Bahn für die Vorbereitungen, die notwendigen Insiderinformationen und die entsprechende Vorbereitung der Bühne (Fahrtroute, mangelhafte Sicherheitsvorkehrungen, bzw. monatelange “Bauarbeiten” in den WTC-Türmen, Ansetzen der Luftverteidigungsübungen am selben Tag, Verzögerung des Starts von Abfangjägern, diese zudem auf den Atlantik hinausgeschickt), sowie die nachfolgende Vertuschung sorgte.

        Gegen den Willen des »Deep State« in »God’s own country« könnte der bewußte Zwergstaat sowas nie ins Werk setzen, ohne von der Landkarte gepustet zu werden, doch diese Frage stellt sich ja für diese Leute leider nie – ich muß hier die Machtverhältnisse im Land der unbegrenzten Zumutungen ja nicht näher erläutern.
        Ob die Ausführenden (die Schützen im Falle JFK) überhaupt wußten, für wen sie da die Drecksarbeit machten, möchte ich doch sehr bezweifeln, ebenso, daß diese etwa dem Mossad angehörten. So auffällig braucht man nicht agieren, da kann man irgendwelche Typen nehmen, die man mit falschen Angaben (Kuba, Anti-Castro, usw.) geködert hat.

        Aber ich erinnere an die Aussagen, die Oliver Stone dem “General X” beim Treffen mit Jim Garrison in Washington (übrigens immer schön im Hintergrund der Freimaurer-Obelisk zu sehen) in den Mund gelegt hat. Sinngemäß etwa:

        »Ja warum, das ist die große Frage. Wer hatte ein Interesse daran, wer profitierte davon. Das »Wie« und »Wer« soll doch nur von den Motiven ablenken.«

        Und hier hätten wir ein Motiv, das bedeutsam und wichtig genug wäre – und vor allem hätten die Betreffenden ihre Ziele danach in vollem Umfang erreicht – im Gegensatz etwa zu den immer wieder ins Spiel gebrachten Anti-Castro-Kubanern, denn die wären ja wohl um den “Erfolg” ihrer “Bemühungen” gebracht worden, oder ist LJB etwa in Kuba einmarschiert und hat Castro gestürzt oder umgebracht? Nee, der ist neulich steinalt eines natürlichen Todes gestorben und die Kommunisten sind nach wie vor in Havanna an der Macht… 😉

        Generell wird JFK als sehr positiv gezeichnet: Gegen die Zentralbank war er, gegen den Vietnamkrieg, fuer ein Ende des Kalten Krieges etc.
        Ich hab mit diesem Bild sehr grosse Schwierigkeiten.

        Da bin ich Deiner Meinung, die Sache mit der FED z.B. ist wohl so nicht haltbar:
        http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty_fed.htm

        Und auch mit Vietnam ist die Sache nicht so eindeutig:

        NSAM 263 envisioned a small withdrawal of troops from South Vietnam, and it was hoped that the South Vietnamese would progressively take over the task of their own defense as American involvement decreased. No one can know what Kennedy would have done had a continued American involvement been required to stave off a Communist takeover, but his hawkish public statements suggest he might well have escalated just as Johnson did.

        http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/context1.htm

        1. Die Zionisten und Doppelpassler sind deutlich ueberrepraesentiert innerhalb der Regierungs- und Medienapparate der USA, was eine sehr grosse Rolle spielt auch bei den Verdeckten Operationen der USA und dem Lenken der Amerikaner im Sinne dieser Israellobby.

          Bei 9/11 tue ich mich leichter eine Coproduktion zu denken als bei JFK, aber die Saat ist ausgebracht.

          Hitler in Argentinien, er kam per U-Boot, und alles in den JFK files… Wahnsinn. Ich kaue dran, aber grinsend 🙂

  3. »It’s only fair to remind or inform your readers of the theory posed by Michael Collins Piper in ‘Final Judgment’.
    https://www.amazon.com/Final-Judgment-Missing-Assassination-Conspiracy/dp/0974548405

    His theory makes more sense than anything.

    […]

    What the book does say is that: When New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison charged businessman Clay Shaw with participation in the JFK assassination conspiracy Garrison stumbled upon the Israeli Mossad connection to the murder of President Kennedy. Shaw served on the board of a shadowy corporation known as Permindex. A primary shareholder in Permindex was the Banque De Credit International of Geneva, founded by Tibor Rosenbaum, an arms procurer and financier for the Mossad.

    What’s more, the Mossad-sponsored Swiss bank was the chief “money laundry” for Meyer Lansky, the head of the international crime syndicate and an Israeli loyalist whose operations meshed closely on many fronts with the American CIA.

    The chairman of Permindex was Louis M. Bloomfield of Montreal, a key figure in the Israeli lobby and an operative of the Bronfman family of Canada, long-time Lansky associates and among Israel’s primary international patrons.

    In the pages of “Final Judgment” the Israeli connection to the JFK assassination is explored in frightening–and fully documented–detail. For example, did you know:

    * That JFK was engaged in a bitter secret conflict with Israel over U.S. East policy and that Israel’s prime minister resigned in disgust, saying JFK’s stance threatened Israel’s very survival?

    * That JFK’s successor, Lyndon Johnson, immediately reversed America’s policy toward Israel?

    * That the top Mafia figures often alleged to be behind the JFK assassination were only front men for Meyer Lansky?

    * That the CIA’s liaison to the Mossad, James Angleton, was a prime mover behind the cover-up of the JFK assassination?

    Why didn’t Oliver Stone, in his famous movie “JFK” not mention any of this? It turns out the chief financial backer of Stone’s film was longtime Mossad figure, Arnon Milchan, Israel’s biggest arms dealer.

    The very fact that the Israeli lobby has gone through such great lengths to try to smear Michael Collins Piper and to try to discredit Final Judgment gives the book great credibility. If the book was really so silly or so unconvincing, it doesn’t seem likely that groups such as the Anti-Defamation League would go out of their way to try to suppress the book as they have.

    The fact is that Piper demonstrates that Israel did indeed have a very strong motive to want to get JFK out of the way and that numerous people who have been linked in other writings to the JFK conspiracy were (as Piper documents) also in the sphere of influence of Israel’s Mossad. Not only Clay Shaw in New Orleans, but also James Angleton at the CIA, who was Israel’s strongest advocate at the CIA and also the CIA’s liaison to the Mossad. The Israeli connection is indeed “the missing link in the JFK assassination conspiracy.” […]

    In fact, anybody familiar with any of the standard writings on the JFK assassination will recognize the names of some of the key players in the scenario Piper documents: Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Guy Banister and James J. Angleton of the CIA–and none of them were Jewish. So where this reviewer gets off saying that Piper finds “a Jew under every rock” is beyond me. I have read literally hundreds of books and magazine articles and other material on the JFK assassination and not in a single one of them–with the exception of Final Judgment–did I ever learn that President John F. Kennedy was trying to stop Israel from building the nuclear bomb and that this literally touched off a “secret war” behind the scenes between JFK and Israel’s prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, who resigned (among other reasons) in disgust over JFK’s policies with Israel. In fact, Israeli historian Avner Cohen in his book, »Israel and the Bomb«, documents this quite thoroughly.

    And in »Final Judgment« Piper also outlines some interesting Israeli connections by people who have been linked to the JFK assassination and cover-up, including Clay Shaw of New Orleans. Even Israeli journalist Barry Chamish has written in an Internet review of »Final Judgment« that he finds Piper’s Israeli connection (via Shaw and Permindex) quite convincing.

    There was a controversy in the Chicago area following an attempt by the Anti-Defamation League (an Israeli lobby organization) and people associated with the ADL to prevent Final Judgment from being placed in the Schaumburg Township District. [….]

    JFK’s Letter To Israeli PM Levi Eshkol July 5, 1963

    Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

    It gives me great personal pleasure to extend congratulations as you assume your responsibilities as Prime Minister of Israel. You have our friendship and best wishes in your new tasks. It is on one of these that I am writing you at this time.

    You are aware, I am sure, of the exchange which I had with Prime Minister Ben-Gurion concerning American visits to Israel’s nuclear facility at Dimona. Most recently, the Prime Minister wrote to me on May 27. His words reflected a most intense personal consideration of a problem that I know is not easy for your Government, as it is not for mine. We welcomed the former Prime Minister’s strong reaffirmation that Dimona will be devoted exclusively to peaceful purposes and the reaffirmation also of Israel’s willingness to permit periodic visits to Dimona.

    I regret having to add to your burdens so soon after your assumption of office, but I feel the crucial importance of this problem necessitates my taking up with you at this early date certain further considerations, arising out of Mr. Ben-Gurion’s May 27 letter, as to the nature and scheduling of such visits.

    I am sure you will agree that these visits should be as nearly as possible in accord with international standards, thereby resolving all doubts as to the peaceful intent of the Dimona project. As I wrote Mr. Ben-Gurion, this Government’s commitment to and support of Israel could be seriously jeopardized if it should be thought that we were unable to obtain reliable information on a subject as vital to the peace as the question of Israel’s effort in the nuclear field.

    Therefore, I asked our scientists to review the alternative schedules of visits we and you had proposed. If Israel’s purposes are to be clear beyond reasonable doubt, I believe that the schedule which would best serve our common purposes would be a visit early this summer, another visit in June 1964, and thereafter at intervals of six months. I am sure that such a schedule should not cause you any more difficulty than that which Mr. Ben-Gurion proposed in his May 27 letter. It would be essential, and I understand that Mr. Ben-Gurion’s letter was in accord with this, that our scientist have access to all areas of the Dimona site and to any related part of the complex, such as fuel fabrication facilities or plutonium separation plant, and that sufficient time to be allotted for a thorough examination.

    Knowing that you fully appreciate the truly vital significance of this matter to the future well-being of Israel, to the United States, and internationally, I am sure our carefully considered request will have your most sympathetic attention.

    Sincerely,
    John F. Kennedy

    http://www.rense.com/general42/enemies.htm

    Die scharfe Auseinandersetzung Kennedys mit der israelischen Regierung wird bestätigt durch den israelischen Militärhistoriker Prof. Martin van Crefeld in der Jungen Freiheit Nr. 04/2006 vom 20. Januar 2006:

    »Und was Israel angeht: Präsident Kennedy hat ernsthaft versucht, eine israelische Atombombe zu verhindern, er stellte deshalb sogar zeitweise die amerikanische Sicherheitsgarantie für Israel in Frage. Erst unter seinem Nachfolger Johnson ab 1963, der unter dem Druck des Vietnamkrieges stand und anders als Kennedy politisch von der jüdischen Lobby abhängig war, haben Washington und Tel Aviv ein Gentleman’s Agreement getroffen, unsere 1967 entwickelte Bombe einfach totzuschweigen.«

    Und Victor Ostrovsky in »Geheimakte Mossad« (Goldmann Taschenbuchausgabe, München 1996, S. 349):

    »Jedesmal, wenn ein Präsident mit Israel nicht auf bestem Fuße stand, wurden die jüdischen Organisationen angewiesen, den Vizepräsidenten zu umschmeicheln. […] Das stand auch hinter der kräftigen Unterstützung für Johnson, der in seinem ersten Jahr als Präsident die Hilfe für Israel beinahe verdoppelte, nachdem Kennedy das israelische Nuklearprogramm scharf kritisiert hatte, weil er glaubte, daß es der erste und gefährliche Schritt zur Weiterverbreitung von Atomwaffen in der Region wäre – ganz zu schweigen von der Tatsache, daß die Familie Kennedy immer als antisemitisch angesehen wurde, angefangen bei Joseph Kennedy, dem Vater von JFK, der bei ihnen als Nazi-Sympathisant galt.«

    Ach ja, und noch was zu “Jack Ruby”, der den Sündenbock Lee Harvey Oswald wenige Tage nach dem Attentat erschoß, damit es zu keiner Gerichtsverhandlung kommen konnte:

    » Jack Ruby, born Jacob Rubenstein, was the fifth of his parents’ eight living children. There is much confusion about his exact birth date. School records report it as June 23, April 25, March 13, and, possibly, March 3, 1911. Other early official records list his date of birth as April 21 and April 26, 1911. During his adult life the date Ruby used most frequently was March 25, 1911. His driver’s license, seized following his arrest, and his statements to the FBI on November 24, 1963, listed this date. However, the police arrest report for November 24 gave his birth date as March 19, 1911.

    Since the recording of births was not required in Chicago prior to 1915, Ruby’s birth may never have been officially recorded. No substantial conflict exists, however, about whether Jack Ruby was born in 1911. Ruby has one older brother and three older sisters. […]

    Jack Ruby’s father, Joseph Rubenstein, was born in 1871 in Sokolov, a small town near Warsaw, Poland, then under the rule of Czarist Russia. He entered the Russian artillery in 1893. There he learned the carpentry trade, which had been practiced by his father and at least one brother and he picked up the habit of excessive drinking that was to plague him for the rest of his life. While in the army, he married Jack’s mother, Fannie Turek Rutkowski; the marriage was arranged, as was customary, by a professional matchmaker. According to his oldest son, Joseph Rubenstein served in China, Korea, and Siberia, detesting these places and army life. Eventually, in 1898, he simply “walked away” from it and about 4 years later he went to England and Canada, entering the United States in 1903.

    Settling in Chicago Joseph Rubenstein joined the carpenters union in 1904 and remained a member until his death in 1958. Although he worked fairly steadily until 1928, be was unemployed during the last 30 years of his life. The only other group which Joseph Rubenstein joined consisted of fellow immigrants from Sokolov. His daughter Eva described this group as purely social and completely nonpolitical.

    Jack Ruby’s mother, Fannie Rubenstein, was probably born in 1875 near Warsaw, Poland. She followed her husband to the United States in 1904 or 1905, accompanied by her children Hyman and Ann. An illiterate woman, she went to night school in about 1920 to learn how to sign her name. She apparently failed in this endeavor, however, for an alien registration form, filed after about 35 years in the United States, was signed by an “X”. Although she apparently learned some English, her speech was predominantly Yiddish, the primary language of the Rubenstein household. Still, Mrs. Rubenstein felt strongly that her children required an education in order to better themselves. She frequently argued about this with her husband, who had received little, if any, formal education and firmly believed that grammar school training was sufficient for his children.

    Childhood and Youth (1911-33)

    In 1911, when Jack Ruby was born, his family resided near 14th and Newberry Streets in Chicago, the first in a series of Jewish neighborhoods in which the Rubensteins lived during his childhood. In 1916, the Rubensteins lived at 1232 Morgan Street, where they apparently remained until 1921. This was the fourth residence in the first 5 years of Jack Ruby’s life. Earl Ruby described one typical neighborhood in which the family lived as a “ghetto” with “pushcarts on the sirens.”

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ruby.htm

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.